Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
28 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Dungeons & Dragons: Wrath of Ashardalon Board Game» Forums » Rules

Subject: "Instead Of Moving" Powers rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Erik Nicely
United States
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
When a power or treasure grants an effect that is given instead of moving does it cancel all movement in the Hero Phase or just one of the 2 possible movement actions?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryce K. Nielsen
United States
Elk Ridge
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hm, good question, it's never come up in our games. I would think it's supposed to only take one of your movement "actions", since if you did a move + attack and sacrificed that move, you'd still be able to perform the other half action.

On the other hand, most of those cards state "instead of moving", and going by RAW that would mean that you cannot move, at all, that turn.

Not really sure which way to rule this...

-shnar
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dorian Mogos
Serbia
Beograd
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'd go with the sensible RAI for this one and say it only takes one move action.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tristan Hall
England
Manchester
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
LIFEFORM - LIVE NOW ON KICKSTARTER!!!
badge
LIFEFORM - LIVE NOW ON KICKSTARTER!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
"Instead Of Moving" sounds to me like "Instead Of Moving", so I'd probably so that you do this "Instead Of Moving", i.e. you "Do Not Move".

I suppose you could say that moving one square is moving so you could do it "Instead Of Moving That One Square And So Continue Moving After That Up To Your Total Speed Minus That One Square".

Or "Instead Of Moving In Real Life" so you get another player to move your mini whilst you sit very still.

Or "Instead Of Moving House", which you're unlikely to do during a game, so you just ignore the rule altogether and crack on.

It's really whatever makes the most sense to you at the end of the day. arrrh
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Redford
Michigan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ninjadorg wrote:
"Instead Of Moving" sounds to me like "Instead Of Moving", so I'd probably so that you do this "Instead Of Moving", i.e. you "Do Not Move".

I suppose you could say that moving one square is moving so you could do it "Instead Of Moving That One Square And So Continue Moving After That Up To Your Total Speed Minus That One Square".

Or "Instead Of Moving In Real Life" so you get another player to move your mini whilst you sit very still.

Or "Instead Of Moving House", which you're unlikely to do during a game, so you just ignore the rule altogether and crack on.

It's really whatever makes the most sense to you at the end of the day. arrrh


I agree with the "Do Not Move". If they wanted to let you move once with it, then it would be no different than moving and attacking. And in that case, they would have just said to use the power/treasure instead of attacking, meaning you could still move once.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Maankin, Gent.
Belgium
Gent
flag msg tools
Avatar
In your hero phase you can do one of the following:

MOVE - ATTACK
ATTACK - MOVE
MOVE - MOVE

I think the "instead of moving" means you forfeit one of your MOVE options.
Similarly when a card says "instead of attacking" you forfeit your attack option.

So, I think when using this card you forgo the option to MOVE twice.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryce K. Nielsen
United States
Elk Ridge
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Maankin wrote:
In your hero phase you can do one of the following:

MOVE - ATTACK
ATTACK - MOVE
MOVE - MOVE

I think the "instead of moving" means you forfeit one of your MOVE options.
Similarly when a card says "instead of attacking" you forfeit your attack option.

So, I think when using this card you forgo the option to MOVE twice.


We are at a RAW vs RAI (rules as written vs. rules as intended), and it's hard to say which way it's really intended. If you call WotC, they'll say no movement, period (i.e. RAW). IMHO, it's up to your group on how you want to play it.

-shnar
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Nicely
United States
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Makes sense It could be a matter of reading what is in the rules instead of what isn't. In that case the RAW says no movement. Period. I think I'll take another look at the cards and weigh how strong they are vs. no movement. The thing is the magic crossbow treasure (forfeit movement for a +4/1 damage attack) is less powerful than the Burning Sphere spell. But it would be equal to the spell if only one of the two potential moves is forfeited, giving an extra attack. Then again, maybe the crossbow isn't supposed to be powerful.zombie

So far I've played it that only 1 move is given up.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian M
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
We are at a RAW vs RAI (rules as written vs. rules as intended)...

I don't think its clear what the rules mean as written, or what the intention was.

If "instead of moving" means you don't move at all, it implies you could use multiple "instead of moving" abilities on your turn.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tristan Hall
England
Manchester
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
LIFEFORM - LIVE NOW ON KICKSTARTER!!!
badge
LIFEFORM - LIVE NOW ON KICKSTARTER!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
StormKnight wrote:
If "instead of moving" means you don't move at all, it implies you could use multiple "instead of moving" abilities on your turn.


I think this guy smokes the same stuff as you:


4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nathaniel GOUSSET
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Ok,

and what about playing the Attack card that move you close to a monster. Is it moving or not ?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian M
United States
North Canton
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
IKerensky wrote:
Ok,

and what about playing the Attack card that move you close to a monster. Is it moving or not ?


I'd think that an attack that moves you, like Charge, is an attack. It just happens that, as a consequence of the attack, your Hero ends up somewhere else.

We didn't even think of the possibility that "instead of moving" could mean that one couldn't get both move actions, but then again, it never really came up. We've been running it that "instead of moving, do this" means "spend a move action to do this".
This also means that someone who's Dazed can only attack, move, or do an "instead of moving" action. It seems that, ordinarily, one could potentially do 2 "instead of moving" actions but then have no moves or attacks left.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Nicely
United States
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Arborshate wrote:
IKerensky wrote:
Ok,

and what about playing the Attack card that move you close to a monster. Is it moving or not ?


I'd think that an attack that moves you, like Charge, is an attack. It just happens that, as a consequence of the attack, your Hero ends up somewhere else.



I agree.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anders Pedersen
Denmark
Copenhagen N.
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Harkonnen13 wrote:
When a power or treasure grants an effect that is given instead of moving does it cancel all movement in the Hero Phase or just one of the 2 possible movement actions?

Hmm...
I originally thought it meant you had to sacrifice just a single move action.
But looking at the rules for the Dazed condition it says: "You can only Move or Attack, not both".
Clearly that means 1 move action or 1 attack action. Can't imagine they would allow for a dazed character to sprint!

So in that light, I would expect movement is not an option at all.
But it's a grey area for sure.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anders Pedersen
Denmark
Copenhagen N.
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
But then again...
The crossbow says "instead of moving" as well.
That would mean a character can fire the crossbow and then attack, but not fire the crossbow and then move.
Now thats...
I'm confused...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryce K. Nielsen
United States
Elk Ridge
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Heh, good catch on the Dazed condition. The rules define "Move" as moving a number of squares equal to your Speed. They define "2 Moves" as two separate Move actions. If an effect says, "Instead of moving", then it's really not clear if that means "instead of a Move action" or "instead of all Move actions" or "instead of any kind of movement taken that turn regardless of how it happened".

Until there's some kind of FAQ though, it's just going to be up to your group to decide how to play. I'm leaning though as interpreting "instead of move" to be "instead of one Move action".

-shnar
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ray Tackett

Johnson City
Tennessee
msg tools
mbmbmbmb
IMO, I take it as to be able to take 2 move actions you must be able to move for the first action. Instead of moving doesnt give you the option to move , it says instead. The crossbow I guess means that you are spending time to reload. Thats just my opinion.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jean-Philippe Thériault
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
RAW says no move at all.

But I'm calling it early and saying once the designers will chime in they'll say the RAI is that it takes only half your turn. To me it seems like a sloppy copy of 4E mechanics due to the simplification of the rules from getting one Standard and one Move action, with a Standard being able to be spent to get a Move action, to this simplified system of getting Move-Attack, Attack-Move or Move-Move. Abilities that replace one attack can use this wording without problems because you get at most one attack a turn. Somebody just forgot that it is not so simple to translate the ability if it takes a Move action instead.

It is also the only interpretation for which attacks that also contain a move component don't cause a rupture of the space-time continuum.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anders Pedersen
Denmark
Copenhagen N.
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Just to muddy the waters...
Traps all say "instead of attacking" in regards to disabling them.
So a person can move and disable, or disable and move. But not attack and disable.
Taking it RAW, we have just as odd a situation as with the crossbow, mentioned earlier.

I believe the intention of the rules is for abilities saying "instead of moving" to mean the primary move action, and "instead of attacking" to mean the move-or-attack action.
Reading it any other way just doesn't make sense, IMHO.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Bradley
United Kingdom
Haverhill
Suffolk
flag msg tools
badge
The best things in life aren't things.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The more I think about it the more I think it should be one move action that is sacrificed. Once you bring in stuff like traps and curses too many weird situations arise when you try and sacrifice an entire turn's option to move. Most involve the damn crossbow though

On the other hand it is a "Crossbow of Speed" so potentially firing twice per turn for 2x move actions seems in keeping with its theme.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian M
United States
North Canton
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
It's also interesting in that, if "instead of moving" means "instead of leaving your square", then could a Dazed character attack and use any number of "instead of moving" powers?
I'm planning to play it that "instead of moving" means "spend a move action", since the game is based on 4E which is based on 3.5, & I know what I'm doing in 3.5. XD
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tristan Hall
England
Manchester
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
LIFEFORM - LIVE NOW ON KICKSTARTER!!!
badge
LIFEFORM - LIVE NOW ON KICKSTARTER!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fwing wrote:
The more I think about it the more I think it should be one move action that is sacrificed. Once you bring in stuff like traps and curses too many weird situations arise when you try and sacrifice an entire turn's option to move. Most involve the damn crossbow though

On the other hand it is a "Crossbow of Speed" so potentially firing twice per turn for 2x move actions seems in keeping with its theme.


So once you've agreed not to move because you've traded moving to do an action Instead Of Moving, you're then going to trade not moving again to do another action? Why don't you just call it the Crossbow of Infinity and attack as many times as you like? At Will powers say At Will on them, so why not just start using them At Will instead of once per turn? whistle
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Bradley
United Kingdom
Haverhill
Suffolk
flag msg tools
badge
The best things in life aren't things.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ninjadorg wrote:
Fwing wrote:
The more I think about it the more I think it should be one move action that is sacrificed. Once you bring in stuff like traps and curses too many weird situations arise when you try and sacrifice an entire turn's option to move. Most involve the damn crossbow though

On the other hand it is a "Crossbow of Speed" so potentially firing twice per turn for 2x move actions seems in keeping with its theme.


So once you've agreed not to move because you've traded moving to do an action Instead Of Moving, you're then going to trade not moving again to do another action? Why don't you just call it the Crossbow of Infinity and attack as many times as you like? At Will powers say At Will on them, so why not just start using them At Will instead of once per turn? whistle


Explain how using two movement orders to fire a crossblow twice becomes "infinity"?
Not moving at all for an entire turn in order to fire a magical crossbow twice and twice only seems reasonable (and thematic) to me. It also avoids about 3 billion paradoxes/ambiguities when interpreting other cards.
I haven't tried this theory out yet but I will be running my next few games using it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tristan Hall
England
Manchester
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
LIFEFORM - LIVE NOW ON KICKSTARTER!!!
badge
LIFEFORM - LIVE NOW ON KICKSTARTER!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fwing wrote:
ninjadorg wrote:
Fwing wrote:
The more I think about it the more I think it should be one move action that is sacrificed. Once you bring in stuff like traps and curses too many weird situations arise when you try and sacrifice an entire turn's option to move. Most involve the damn crossbow though

On the other hand it is a "Crossbow of Speed" so potentially firing twice per turn for 2x move actions seems in keeping with its theme.


So once you've agreed not to move because you've traded moving to do an action Instead Of Moving, you're then going to trade not moving again to do another action? Why don't you just call it the Crossbow of Infinity and attack as many times as you like? At Will powers say At Will on them, so why not just start using them At Will instead of once per turn? whistle


Explain how using two movement orders to fire a crossblow twice becomes "infinity"?


It's logical progression - Instead of Moving means you've already traded away the ability to move. If having done that, you're now saying you're going to trade away the ability to move (something you no longer have) again, then following your logic there's nothing stopping you from saying that that an infinite number of times.

Fwing wrote:
I haven't tried this theory out yet but I will be running my next few games using it.


Good for you. cool
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Bradley
United Kingdom
Haverhill
Suffolk
flag msg tools
badge
The best things in life aren't things.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ninjadorg wrote:
Fwing wrote:
ninjadorg wrote:
Fwing wrote:
The more I think about it the more I think it should be one move action that is sacrificed. Once you bring in stuff like traps and curses too many weird situations arise when you try and sacrifice an entire turn's option to move. Most involve the damn crossbow though

On the other hand it is a "Crossbow of Speed" so potentially firing twice per turn for 2x move actions seems in keeping with its theme.


So once you've agreed not to move because you've traded moving to do an action Instead Of Moving, you're then going to trade not moving again to do another action? Why don't you just call it the Crossbow of Infinity and attack as many times as you like? At Will powers say At Will on them, so why not just start using them At Will instead of once per turn? whistle


Explain how using two movement orders to fire a crossblow twice becomes "infinity"?


It's logical progression - Instead of Moving means you've already traded away the ability to move. If having done that, you're now saying you're going to trade away the ability to move (something you no longer have) again, then following your logic there's nothing stopping you from saying that that an infinite number of times.

Fwing wrote:
I haven't tried this theory out yet but I will be running my next few games using it.


Good for you. cool


You appear to have misunderstood what I'm suggesting.
Instead of reading "Instead of moving" as "do not move at all" I'm reading it as "Instead of one movement action". So the most you can do it two, giving up both actions of a "Move - Move" hero phase.
I've no doubt it'll change the dynamics of the game but I can't think of any instance where the interpretation breaks down. Unlike the "do not move at all" interpretation.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.